55528 réponses à ce sujet

[Applepie_Svk]

CoolioThane wrote...

@Raven

I'm enjoying reading the quotes the literalists are giving (when they aren't abusing me) - are you ?

http://social.biowar.../index/13162064  - try this thread...

[CoolioThane]

Applepie_Svk wrote...

CoolioThane wrote...

@Raven

I'm enjoying reading the quotes the literalists are giving (when they aren't abusing me) - are you ?

http://social.biowar.../index/13162064  - try this thread...

Hadn't noticed that before! Very interesting, thank you! 

[Simon_Says]

About that whole Starbrat/Shepard voice business. I think that Boware incorporating the voices for both Shepards within the Starbrat's voice is an obvious sign that the Catalyst's dialogue is meant to break the fourth wall to some degree. The Catalyst is speaking not only to Shepard but the player as well.

"Your belief is not required." (i.e. Shepard's belief is not required. The player's belief, is.)

[MaximizedAction]

Simon_Says wrote...

About that whole Starbrat/Shepard voice business. I think that Boware incorporating the voices for both Shepards within the Starbrat's voice is an obvious sign that the Catalyst's dialogue is meant to break the fourth wall to some degree. The Catalyst is speaking not only to Shepard but the player as well.

"Your belief is not required." (i.e. Shepard's belief is not required. The player's belief, is.)

You know what is really scary, 2h ago I was writing a comment but forgot what my point was, so I didn't post it. The post contained your first paragraph almost word for word.

But that last part, about the players belief, that is interesting! It especially makes sense of the contradiction, that is TIM only minutes ago saying "I need you to believe"/"Have a little faith".

Modifié par MaximizedAction, 22 juillet 2012 - 04:54 .

[Fingertrip]

Isn't IT clearly debunked considering that they didn't wish to come into ways of how the ending is interpretaded (Or at least so they say), yet show no signs of any type of Indoctrination in the extended cut.

The Indoctrination Theory relies on more things to come from what has been seen, yet they've explicity said that Extended Cut marks the end of Shepards journey, they would be contradicting themselves if they continued to add more to the ending, etc;

I feel Indoctrination Theory is dead can be, there's nothing more to it.

[MaximizedAction]

Fingertrip wrote...

Isn't IT clearly debunked considering that they didn't wish to come into ways of how the ending is interpretaded (Or at least so they say), yet show no signs of any type of Indoctrination in the extended cut.

The Indoctrination Theory relies on more things to come from what has been seen, yet they've explicity said that Extended Cut marks the end of Shepards journey, they would be contradicting themselves if they continued to add more to the ending, etc;

I feel Indoctrination Theory is dead can be, there's nothing more to it.

See my sig. Chris posted that as a lockdown message to that thread that asked for the IT thread to be moved to the fan-fiction section of BSN.

Also, as a argument that doesn't rely on authorities: Not talking about something doesn't make it vanish. BW not taking any stand on IT, doesn't make it less possible. That's logic 101.

Modifié par MaximizedAction, 22 juillet 2012 - 04:59 .

[RavenEyry]

Fingertrip wrote...

Isn't IT clearly debunked considering that they didn't wish to come into ways of how the ending is interpretaded (Or at least so they say), yet show no signs of any type of Indoctrination in the extended cut.

The Indoctrination Theory relies on more things to come from what has been seen, yet they've explicity said that Extended Cut marks the end of Shepards journey, they would be contradicting themselves if they continued to add more to the ending, etc;

I feel Indoctrination Theory is dead can be, there's nothing more to it.

They're already planning to continue to add to the ending, extended cut included some dialogue from leviathan.

[CoolioThane]

Fingertrip wrote...

Isn't IT clearly debunked considering that they didn't wish to come into ways of how the ending is interpretaded (Or at least so they say), yet show no signs of any type of Indoctrination in the extended cut.

The Indoctrination Theory relies on more things to come from what has been seen, yet they've explicity said that Extended Cut marks the end of Shepards journey, they would be contradicting themselves if they continued to add more to the ending, etc;

I feel Indoctrination Theory is dead can be, there's nothing more to it.

Well clearly there are quite a few others who don't believe it to be dead.

The Extended Cut, which was meant to "make the stuff that's already there shine even more rather than try and change and adapt what's there to reach out to a broader audience looking for something that just was never intended"

But...they added more clues and didn't take away all of the ones already in the game...

...No IT isn't CLEARLY DEBUNKED at all

[Rosewind]

*Demonic Reaper voice* So Be it.....

[ean0611]

@RavenEyry, the thread you link has something important in it. The relay explosions.

They redid almost every cinematic for the EC, but they didn't "fix" this.

I refuse to believe this is an oversight. Nothing at that point can be real if that is fake. If they wanted it to be real, they would have "fixed" it for EC.

This leaves the question, when did the hallucination start, not IF Shep was hallucinating.

The literal cannot happen, as the out of order relay explosion is the same for synthesis and control. Both of those are clearly fake as well.

I hope Bioware puts out a real ending. ME1 and ME2 had clear decisive endings. I want one here.

EDIT: To further my point, the charon relay is shown first with the citidel as the start point for the "Destruction", but the Charon Relay gets hit by the "explotion" on the galaxy map 3rd or 4th hop.

Modifié par ean0611, 22 juillet 2012 - 05:06 .

[RavenEyry]

ean0611 wrote...

@RavenEyry, the thread you link has something important in it. The relay explosions.

They redid almost every cinematic for the EC, but they didn't "fix" this.

Although we can't figure out exactly where the explosions start in this cinematic, one of the prime candidates is the system from arrival. Y'know, the one that already exploded months before.

[ean0611]

RavenEyry wrote...

ean0611 wrote...

@RavenEyry, the thread you link has something important in it. The relay explosions.

They redid almost every cinematic for the EC, but they didn't "fix" this.

Although we can't figure out exactly where the explosions start in this cinematic, one of the prime candidates is the system from arrival. Y'know, the one that already exploded months before.

I agree completly. That being said, the start point is almost near irrelivant beyond the fact it is not the Charon relay.

Quite simply, they intentionally put something obvious and impossible in. They adjusted almost every other cinematic with EC, but not that. This is not an accident.

[MaximizedAction]

RavenEyry wrote...

ean0611 wrote...

@RavenEyry, the thread you link has something important in it. The relay explosions.

They redid almost every cinematic for the EC, but they didn't "fix" this.

Although we can't figure out exactly where the explosions start in this cinematic, one of the prime candidates is the system from arrival. Y'know, the one that already exploded months before.

Which Shepard observed in almost the exacty same way: On the galaxy map (The galaxy on-view is similar) with those big shockwaves (same in the ending).

[ean0611]

MaximizedAction wrote...

RavenEyry wrote...

ean0611 wrote...

@RavenEyry, the thread you link has something important in it. The relay explosions.

They redid almost every cinematic for the EC, but they didn't "fix" this.

Although we can't figure out exactly where the explosions start in this cinematic, one of the prime candidates is the system from arrival. Y'know, the one that already exploded months before.

Which Shepard observed in almost the exacty same way: On the galaxy map (The galaxy on-view is similar) with those big shockwaves (same in the ending).

All good points. The core of it is still the non-subjectivity of the order. To me, the rest is window dressing. Sure it looks nice and fits coherently, but the core of this is Bioware has explicityly told us that 3 endings are hallucinations. 

The refuse ending on the other hand, there is nothing hard or concrete to beleive anything but the reapers beat humanity and eradicated us.

[ean0611]

OOPS, DP. 

Sorry.

Modifié par ean0611, 22 juillet 2012 - 05:15 .

[byne]

ean0611 wrote...

OOPS, DP. 

Sorry.

I totally read DP as meaning something other than double post. My mind is way too dirty.

Anyhow, to answer a question you asked earlier:

This leaves the question, when did the hallucination start, not IF Shep was hallucinating.

I believe it starts when the transport to the beam crashes. What caused the crash is never revealed, nor is the crash even referenced for a split second once you get out. No 'That was close' or anything. Just a crash, then suddenly everyone is fine and standing outside of the transport.

[Chriz Tah Fah]

byne wrote...
I totally read DP as meaning something other than double post. My mind is way too dirty. [smilie]http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/pinched.png[/smilie]

Oh you, byne.

Edit: Got it!

Modifié par Chriz Tah Fah, 22 juillet 2012 - 05:22 .

[CoolioThane]

byne wrote...

ean0611 wrote...

OOPS, DP. 

Sorry.

I totally read DP as meaning something other than double post. My mind is way too dirty.

I did the same thing byne 

[ean0611]

byne wrote...

ean0611 wrote...

OOPS, DP. 

Sorry.

I totally read DP as meaning something other than double post. My mind is way too dirty.

Anyhow, to answer a question you asked earlier:

This leaves the question, when did the hallucination start, not IF Shep was hallucinating.

I believe it starts when the transport to the beam crashes. What caused the crash is never revealed, nor is the crash even referenced for a split second once you get out. No 'That was close' or anything. Just a crash, then suddenly everyone is fine and standing outside of the transport.

I was kind of asking retorically. 

This is the kind of thing that I think will only become clear once the "real" ending is opened up via DLC plans.

(transport crash is a great place though, given the ShepAlive video in destroy ending)

[RavenEyry]

byne wrote...

I believe it starts when the transport to the beam crashes. What caused the crash is never revealed, nor is the crash even referenced for a split second once you get out. No 'That was close' or anything. Just a crash, then suddenly everyone is fine and standing outside of the transport.

The dream starting there would also explain the 2D bodies that can be seen before the laz0r.

[byne]

RavenEyry wrote...

byne wrote...

I believe it starts when the transport to the beam crashes. What caused the crash is never revealed, nor is the crash even referenced for a split second once you get out. No 'That was close' or anything. Just a crash, then suddenly everyone is fine and standing outside of the transport.

The dream starting there would also explain the 2D bodies that can be seen before the laz0r.

It would also explain why Anderson decided to stop being a good tactician and instead decided to just take a page out of Sarge's book.

[ean0611]

RavenEyry wrote...

byne wrote...

I believe it starts when the transport to the beam crashes. What caused the crash is never revealed, nor is the crash even referenced for a split second once you get out. No 'That was close' or anything. Just a crash, then suddenly everyone is fine and standing outside of the transport.

The dream starting there would also explain the 2D bodies that can be seen before the laz0r.

There are other uses of 2D sprites before this. Could also just be resource issue. They wanted to ensure this section runs without any FPS stutters.

Remember, Xbox isn't the highest horsepower system out there.